Evaluation of microdilution and disk diffusion methods for antifungal susceptibility testing of dermatophytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 63 dermatophyte strains belonging to 6 species (Trichophyton rubrum (16), T. mentagrophytes (16), T. tonsurans (20), T. violaceum (2), Microsporum canis (7), and Epidermophyton floccosum (2)) were tested for their in vitro susceptibility to a range of antifungal drugs using disk diffusion and Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute M38-A (CLSI, formerly NCCLS) broth microdilution methods. The antifungals used were ciclopirox (CIC), terbinafine (TER), griseofulvin (GRE), fluconazole (FLC), itraconazole (ITR), posaconazole (POS), and ravuconazole (RAV). In the broth microdilution assay terbinafine was found to have the highest activity followed by ravuconazole, posaconazole, ciclopirox, itraconazole, griseofulvin and fluconazole. In the disk diffusion assay terbinafine produced the largest inhibition zone diameters (IZDs) on Dermasel agar media followed by ravuconazole, griseofulvin, posaconazole, and itraconazole. A significant correlation was not observed between the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and IZDs, but some correlations were observed for POS, RAV, and TER (correlation coefficients r=-0.507, -0.249, -0.267, P<0.05, respectively). MICs obtained by the microdilution method with ITR and GRE did not correlate with IZDs obtained in disk diffusion assays in this study. The ciclopirox (20 microg/disk) and fluconazole (25 microg/disk) did not produce well defined inhibition zone diameters on Dermasel agar medium.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".